Ive come to the conclusion that women arent evil

[Deleted member 3323]

Except their mate selection patterns typically lead to dysgenic results or are easily exploitable because of how simple and primitive they are. For example mate selection to breed warriors who can survive melee combat wars makes no sense in the 21st century where people can be killed by guns, mate selection for status when literally anything can get inflated status nowadays, including DOGS AND HORSES makes no sense, mate selection for an abundance of resources when just about every single person in a first world country who isn't homeless has plenty of resources for survival and even enough for children to boot, especially compared to how things were even 200-300 years ago, then if you become aware of these traits and how to exploit them (which you have to do) it's just kind of retarded.

These mate selection traits may make sense in a devolved primitive society that existed 4000 years ago, but these dysgenic traits must be removed from women for society to progress, and they WERE being removed through domestication by most European civilizations.

Status = looks.

Woman's mate selection is still relevant today, even in modern society.

 

[Deleted member 3323]

caged at you
i guarantee you live in a big city and haven't seen the Milky Way, muh survival

The fuck are you talking about milky way? Stop being retarded you balding sewer roach.

 

[Deleted member 5969]

The fuck are you talking about milky way? Stop being retarded you balding sewer roach.

point proven
you cheeto munching city dwelling abused dog

 

[Deleted member 275]

Status = looks.

Woman's mate selection is still relevant today, even in modern society.

Status/looks only improves the life of the individual that owns those looks/status. It does absolutely nothing for the improvement of society or a person's surroundings.

If anything, it decreases societal value as that status could've been given to a more productive person instead.

This is why it's natural and good that female sexuality is repressed and men make female mating decisions. For the betterment of society.

 

[BrendioEEE]

Status = looks.

Woman's mate selection is still relevant today, even in modern society.

Except that's not true entirely, everything increases your status, including your looks, but there's also societal acceptance of any groups you may be a part of, including some inherent ones, such as your race, your fame, how much money you have, etc, all of these things play a part but you can have an increased status boost that can be anywhere from 2-4 addition points added on to your looks, this in and of itself is a problem, and we know it stems from a dysgenic trait in women relating to primitive societies where they married up into higher castes, and levels of the social ladder, and in tribes and such. Which made sense back then because that meant your children were more likely to survive primitive world. We don't primitive world anymore.

 

[Deleted member 3323]

Except that's not true entirely, everything increases your status, including your looks, but there's also societal acceptance of any groups you may be a part of, including some inherent ones, such as your race, your fame, how much money you have, etc, all of these things play a part but you can have an increased status boost that can be anywhere from 2-4 addition points added on to your looks, this in and of itself is a problem, and we know it stems from a dysgenic trait in women relating to primitive societies where they married up into higher castes, and levels of the social ladder, and in tribes and such. Which made sense back then because that meant your children were more likely to survive primitive world. We don't primitive world anymore.

Except that it's not just women, men too judge based on looks. Its a human thing we cannot escape, but must accept.

 

[BrendioEEE]

Except that it's not just women, men too judge based on looks. Its a human thing we cannot escape, but must accept.

Yes, and there's nothing wrong with judging someone based on looks, we are a visual species that is optically driven, however, our standards are much less high. Men who only want to date their looksmatch or higher are always looked down upon or told they're unrealistic, even ones who LITERALLY only want their looksmatch, and most men settle for far less than what they should be worth, because of dysgenic mate selection traits in women.

 

[Deleted member 3323]

Yes, and there's nothing wrong with judging someone based on looks, we are a visual species that is optically driven, however, our standards are much less high. Men who only want to date their looksmatch or higher are always looked down upon or told they're unrealistic, even ones who LITERALLY only want their looksmatch, and most men settle for far less than what they should be worth, because of dysgenic mate selection traits in women.

And why is this a bad thing? I wouldn't say women selecting mates based on primitive criteria isn't a bad thing, if produces strong offspring and a stronger survival rate(Status/power/money/protection). Sure the genetically inferior will get left out, but that's what's best for the species as a whole.

Imagine allowing men to pick and choose, if men had that power they'd be polymerous and start reproducing with any pussy that passes them by, that's dysgenic breeding.

Women attatch themselves to one mate and I'd say that's better.

If you're a genetically inferior man, you have to work harder and I dont see anything wrong with that.

 

[Deleted member 8853]

fucking simp.


So what about low value women? Why do short women and ugly women get to reproduce?

Low value women should be treated just like low value men. simple.

They need to be sterilised

 

[Deleted member 3323]

They need to be sterilised

Sterilize low value men and low value women.

 

[BrendioEEE]

And why is this a bad thing? I wouldn't say women selecting mates based on primitive criteria isn't a bad thing, if produces strong offspring and a stronger survival rate(Status/power/money/protection). Sure the genetically inferior will get left out, but that's what's best for the species as a whole.

Imagine allowing men to pick and choose, if men had that power they'd be polymerous and start reproducing with any pussy that passes them by, that's dysgenic breeding.

Women attatch themselves to one mate and I'd say that's better.

If you're a genetically inferior man, you have to work harder and I dont see anything wrong with that.

Except it doesn't leave out the genetically inferior, it's actually quite the opposite. For example we know, women do NOT mate select for intelligence, at ALL pretty much, even ones that are genetic anomalies themselves with above average IQs.

Do we really need more warriors who are suited for melee combat wars in a battlefield 2000 years ago? Do we really need to propagate the elites of the world even further do they benefit humanity with the offspring they create? Does any of this truly allow for more growth as a species? Or does it lead to its downfall.

You see when you study evolutionary biology even a little bit, and you look into artificial selective breeding, and eugenics, you realize, humans, but mostly women, do not make positive mate selection choices when it comes to advancing our species, and the races within it. If they did, we would have achieved 21st century technology a few hundred years after the roman empire fell, except it wouldn't have fallen, and there would never have been a dark ages because most humans wouldn't have been retarded. We're on a path to hit the dark ages again, because of dysgenic mate selection.

We need more people who can use their brain, not people who can use their brawn, we barely have anyone who can use their brain at all, most humans are mostly collectivist even if they claim individuality, they lack enough brain power or self awareness to do anything or think about anything in a complex manner. We need people who want to make and use tools to advance human prowess, not people who can bonk someone on the head harder than the other.

 

[Deleted member 8853]

Sterilize low value men and low value women.

Both.
And for the love of god
Not just people who are ugly but the unintelligent and disabled too.

 

[Deleted member 3323]

Both.
And for the love of god
Not just people who are ugly but the unintelligent and disabled too.

I don't advocate for not sterlizling normies but anyone who literally looks like birdcel or saint bo2 needs to get a vasectomy

 

[Deleted member 3323]

Except it doesn't leave out the genetically inferior, it's actually quite the opposite. For example we know, women do NOT mate select for intelligence, at ALL pretty much, even ones that are genetic anomalies themselves with above average IQs.

Do we really need more warriors who are suited for melee combat wars in a battlefield 2000 years ago? Do we really need to propagate the elites of the world even further do they benefit humanity with the offspring they create? Does any of this truly allow for more growth as a species? Or does it lead to its downfall.

You see when you study evolutionary biology even a little bit, and you look into artificial selective breeding, and eugenics, you realize, humans, but mostly women, do not make positive mate selection choices when it comes to advancing our species, and the races within it. If they did, we would have achieved 21st century technology a few hundred years after the roman empire fell, except it wouldn't have fallen, and there would never have been a dark ages because most humans wouldn't have been retarded. We're on a path to hit the dark ages again, because of dysgenic mate selection.

We need more people who can use their brain, not people who can use their brawn, we barely have anyone who can use their brain at all, most humans are mostly collectivist even if they claim individuality, they lack enough brain power or self awareness to do anything or think about anything in a complex manner. We need people who want to make and use tools to advance human prowess, not people who can bonk someone on the head harder than the other.

IQ is highly correlated with looks. And those with an actual high IQ, i'm talking 145+ are likely to be sucessful and mate regardlessif theyre not autistic which is what you want, right? everything is in perfect order.

 

[Uglybrazilian]

Women are only evil for genetic dead ends.

 

[ascentium]

They're just exceptionally harsh when it comes to mate choice. Which makes sense for the survival of the species. One can even say that they're altruistic.

Sounds Chad. Show your face, Chad.

 

[Deleted member 3323]

Sounds Chad. Show your face, Chad.

Im not chad.

 

[CupOfCoffee]

I think religion was onto something when describing women as evil. Even Islam says 99% of the inhabitants of hell are women

 

[Deleted member 4612]

here's a question for OP

If a man finds a woman alone in an empty area and rapes her, is he "evil"?

 

[Deleted member 11406]

Only guys who don't interact with women think they are evil

 

[Deleted member 11406]

here's a question for OP

If a man finds a woman alone in an empty area and rapes her, is he "evil"?

You want Sergeant passing this again?

 

[Deleted member 4612]

You want Sergeant passing this again?
View attachment 909125

har har

i just wanna understand OP's logic

 

[Deleted member 11406]

har har

i just wanna understand OP's logic

People here should stop generalizing women here wihout being a joke, most guys here think that a girlfriend is gonna cheat someone with a Chad

 

[Deleted member 4612]

People here should stop generalizing women here wihout being a joke, most guys here think that a girlfriend is gonna cheat someone with a Chad

jfl you joined less than a month ago and you're already giving orders?

 

[Deleted member 11406]

jfl you joined less than a month ago and you're already giving orders?

Yes

 

[Deleted member 4612]

actual high IQ, i'm talking 145+

jfl so 130-144 ain't high?

 

[MrGlutton]

jfl so 130-144 ain't high?

130+ is significantly higher than average

@op

 

[Deleted member 5969]

Sterilize low value men and low value women.

then the genetic recombination hits and ugly men and women still get produced
and even if that didn't happen hypergamy would still be intact

 

[Deleted member 4612]

Sterilize low value men and low value women.

then the genetic recombination hits and ugly men and women still get produced
and even if that didn't happen hypergamy would still be intact

or create a culture that doesn't emphasize sex, beauty, and narcissism so much

 

[Deleted member 5969]

or create a culture that doesn't emphasize sex, beauty, and narcissism so much

Jesus is the answer

 

[Deleted member 3323]

jfl so 130-144 ain't high?

130+ is significantly higher than average

@op

High but not anything special or worth noting.

 

[Deleted member 4612]

High but not anything special or worth noting.

so only giga geniuses matter? the smart people who aren't genuises are useless?

you do realize iqs have dropped severely in the past few decades? i guess that means we are "evolving"

 

[MrGlutton]

High but not anything special or worth noting.

High but not anything special or worth noting.

how is 130 iq not special

 

[Deleted member 3323]

how is 130 iq not special

Not as good as good or rare as 145-160+ Thats genius range.

 

[MrGlutton]

Not as good as good or rare as 145-160+ Thats genius range.

still doesn't mean 130 iq isn't special

i dont even think 160 is documented too

 

[Deleted member 3323]

so only giga geniuses matter? the smart people who aren't genuises are useless?

you do realize iqs have dropped severely in the past few decades? i guess that means we are "evolving"

Iq has dropped because niggers are producing a lot.

 

[Deleted member 4612]

Iq has dropped because niggers are producing a lot.

any proof of that? or just a statement?

even if its true, it only proves that females are shit at picking partners and reproductive behaviors

 

[Deleted member 3323]

still doesn't mean 130 iq isn't special

i dont even think 160 is documented too

Stephen hawking and albert einstein have an iq at or higher than 160. I've been around 130 iq people, yes they are smarter than the average population and are much more capable but they aren't geniuses like the great men in history. Nikola Tesla/Albert Einstein/Isaac Newton. They don't impress me.

any proof of that? or just a statement?

even if its true, it only proves that females are shit at picking partners and reproductive behaviors

Dude...THINK.

The global population has been booming because poor countries in africa are having a population boom and ethnics/low IQ people tend to reproduce more children therefore they lower the global IQ.

It doesnt mean women are shit at picking mates, theyre just choosing the best options around them.

 

[Deleted member 4612]

It doesnt mean women are shit at picking mates, theyre just choosing the best options around them.

still doubt it. if women were smart about reproducing, they would settle down around 18-22 and get the best mate instead of fornicating with frat boys

 

[Deleted member 4612]

here's a question for OP

If a man finds a woman alone in an empty area and rapes her, is he "evil"?

also @bpdandectasy care to address this?

 

[Deleted member 3323]

still doubt it. if women were smart about reproducing, they would settle down around 18-22 and get the best mate instead of fornicating with frat boys

They fuck frat boys because of their perceived genetic quality.

 

[Deleted member 3323]

also @bpdandectasy care to address this?

Yes that man is evil.

 

[Deleted member 4612]

Yes that man is evil.

why is he evil? he's just trying to fulfill his reproductive strategy

 

[Deleted member 4612]

They fuck frat boys because of their perceived genetic quality.

"perceived genetic quality"

how do we know women's perception is indeed good though? why isn't it bad? you seem to be assuming their perception is perfect

 

[Perma Virgin 666]

here's another scenario. A guy on incels.is told a story about how, since he was white, he wanted to travel to SEA and JBWmaxx. apparently he said something to a female friend not about hiself, but another dude. The female friend got upset and said "ewww, only losers do that"

yet, if the white dude went to SEA, he would be worshipped for his superior genes. So why is the woman getting mad at white dudes who decide to JBWmaxx?

lmao it's true. read an article recently of a white 20-something year old roastie bitching mad about pattaya/thailand. Pattaya is the place people go to, to bang prostitutes for cheap. Western roasties hate that place. They call it degenerate, meanwhile they bounce their flappy ass titties on tiktok.

I'm a cuck but alteast im not an actual abomination, manlet, failed abortion, genetically inferior subhuman who reportedly cries when arguing with atheist.

Btw this is you, dont think I forgot.

View attachment 908863

a gun is all it takes to whipe out you and your girlfriend, so how's that working with your genetic superiority?

in the western world no genetic improvement is happening.
rich, successful people have less kids than poor people, even tho the rich got the looks on their side.
Privileged people are outbred by crackers and thugs.
Birth rates in rich "geneticially superior" countries have been low since feminism hit in the 60s. etc. etc.

 

[Deleted member 8576]

Except their mate selection patterns typically lead to dysgenic results or are easily exploitable because of how simple and primitive they are. For example mate selection to breed warriors who can survive melee combat wars makes no sense in the 21st century where people can be killed by guns, mate selection for status when literally anything can get inflated status nowadays, including DOGS AND HORSES makes no sense, mate selection for an abundance of resources when just about every single person in a first world country who isn't homeless has plenty of resources for survival and even enough for children to boot, especially compared to how things were even 200-300 years ago, then if you become aware of these traits and how to exploit them (which you have to do) it's just kind of retarded.

These mate selection traits may make sense in a devolved primitive society that existed 4000 years ago, but these dysgenic traits must be removed from women for society to progress, and they WERE being removed through domestication by most European civilizations.

 

[Deleted member 3323]

why is he evil? he's just trying to fulfill his reproductive strategy

Women are biologically designed to bare children and select a good mate.


Men are biologically designed to be polymerous and have sex with as many females as possible because if the man is a chad then he will be able to spread his good genetics on a wide-scale, they're only allowed to mate because the females allows them

Contrary to popular belief, rape isnt natural. It only exists in times of warfare.

 

[Deleted member 4612]

Women are biologically designed to bare children and select a good mate.


Men are biologically designed to be polymerous and have sex with as many females as possible because if the man is a chad then he will be able to spread his good genetics on a wide-scale, they're only allowed to mate because the females allows them

Contrary to popular belief, rape isnt natural. It only exists in times of warfare.

@ConorMcGregor care to address this BS?

 

[Deleted member 3323]

@ConorMcGregor care to address this BS?

I was wrong, it is natural, but its more nuanced in my opinion. If you rape a woman in your tribe you'd get penalized by the tribe. Rape only existed when societies pillage another nation or land.

 

[BrendioEEE]

IQ is highly correlated with looks. And those with an actual high IQ, i'm talking 145+ are likely to be sucessful and mate regardlessif theyre not autistic which is what you want, right? everything is in perfect order.

That's actually not true for extreme IQ variations, that's true for slightly above average IQ if you're referencing the data I think you are, but you typically don't see people with 140+ IQ who are extremely physically attractive. In fact people who are slightly above average (110-120) typically if anything just had the IQ they were meant to have at peak health, their mother breastfed them properly, had them at a healthy age, they got the proper nutrients required, etc, which can give a minor albeit not major jump in IQ boost, at least not major compared to natural heritability of IQ, people with slightly below average IQs who look subhuman, or uglier if they are of the same race of course as was measured in the data I believe you're referencing, likely had parents who had them at an older age, did not breastfeed them, and were more likely to have a lack of proper balance in their testosterone and estrogen levels, leading to more "ugly" features.

So no, not everything is in perfect order, and actually there seems to be much more evidence nowadays that particularly young people with extreme IQ variations (zoomers and gen alpha) are going to and ALREADY do have a harder time finding a mate, and even IF they do find a mate, the IQ disparity between them and the female they breed with is likely to cause their children to have a lower average IQ than them.

Explain exactly how this is "Everything in perfect order".